9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (8) TMI 1290X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ravity of the accusation against the petitioner. 2. The first information report was lodged by one Bijayani Mishra, the daughter of Jayashree Mishra (hereafter 'the deceased') before the Inspector in-charge, Town police station, Sambalpur on 21.07.2019 wherein it is stated that the deceased was found missing from her house for which on the report of the informant, Sambalpur Town P.S. SDE No.365 dated 14.10.2011 and MMR No.25 of 2011 were registered. The informant came to know from the locality that petitioner had kidnapped her mother, committed her murder and concealed the dead body somewhere. The local people were also aware about the incident but out of fear, they did not disclose the matter. She received phone calls about the fact from the local people that the petitioner was not staying in the village since the date of occurrence. It is further stated that the family members of the petitioner were also involved in the kidnapping of her mother. Taking the advantage of death of the father of the informant and since there was no male member in the family to look after them, the petitioner used to borrow money and jewellery from the deceased from time to time. Basing on such writ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sequently, Sri R.C. Dora, IIC of Town P.S., Sambalpur took charge of investigation from Sri R.K. Biswal, re-examined the informant and other witnesses and recorded their statements, re-visited the spot in presence of the informant and other witnesses and made a prayer to the ADMO, Medical, DHH, Sambalpur to collect the blood sample of the informant for DNA profiling as per the order of the learned S.D.J.M., Sambalpur. As per the requisition to the ADMO, DHH and order of the learned SDJM, Sambalpur, the blood sample of the informant was collected and the same was sent to SFSL, BBSR for DNA profiling. The I.O. received the DNA examination report from SFSL, Rasulgarh, BBSR in which it was opined that the DNA conducted on the exhibits could not be generated as the required quantity of DNA could not be extracted and therefore, the comparison with other exhibits was not possible and hence, the opinion was inconclusive. The report from Dept. of Forensic Medicine and Toxicology, VIMSAR, Burla was received, in which it was opined that the skeletal remains examined appears to be human in origin, age of the examined occipital bone was less than sixty years, the individuality of the skeletal r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cal vertebrae with soil remnants and parietal bone fragment did not yield any DNA profiles for which no opinion could be furnished, it cannot be said the bones recovered by digging out the earth were that of the deceased and as such the place of burial of the dead body as per the statement of witness Chaitanya Kunar @ Manu is not acceptable. The so-called extrajudicial confession of the petitioner is a concocted version to falsely entangle the petitioner in the alleged crime. He further placed reliance in the case of Babu Singh -Vrs.- State of Uttar Pradesh reported in A.I.R. 1978 S.C. 527 and contended that even in the absence of any change in the circumstances, since the important document like DNA profiling report was not placed and it was not considered while rejecting the earlier bail application, the same can be considered to take a different view as the refusing bail is an interim adjudication. It is further argued that trial has not yet commenced even though the petitioner is in custody for two years and in view of the delayed trial, the bail application of the petitioner may be favourably reconsidered. Mr. Purna Chandra Das, learned Addl. Standing Counsel appearing for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n of the earlier bail application by this Court on 03.08.2020 in BLAPL No.365 of 2020, except the fact that the case has been committed to the Court of Session and the petitioner is detained a further period of one year. The learned counsel for the petitioner contended on 23.04.2021 that even though there is no change in the circumstances but since some important materials could not be placed before this Court at the time of hearing of the earlier bail application, in this successive bail application, those materials can be considered and he also took time to place certain citations in that respect and accordingly, Mr. Panda relied upon the case of Babu Singh (supra). In the said decision, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that at an earlier stage, the application for bail of the petitioners was rejected by the Court on 7th September 1977, but an order refusing application for bail does not necessarily preclude another, on a later occasion, giving more materials, further development and different consideration. It is further held that an interim direction is not a conclusive adjudication, and updated reconsideration is not over-turning an earlier negation. The judgment cited does ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ication. There must be change in the fact situation or in law which requires the earlier view being interfered with or where the earlier finding has become obsolete. This is the limited area in which the application for bail of an accused that has been rejected earlier can be reconsidered. If a bail application is rejected considering some grounds urged by the counsel for the accused and on the self same materials and without any change in the circumstances, the successive bail application is moved taking some other grounds and the Court is asked to reconsider the prayer of bail, it would be an endless exercise for the Court and entertaining such application would be a sheer wastage of valuable time of the Court. On the earlier occasion, taking note of statement of Chaitanya Kuanr and that the murder was committed in a calculated manner, the incident being planned and chalked out, the motive behind the commission of crime and the last seen of the petitioner in the company of the deceased, the bail was rejected. While moving the present bail application, the fresh ground which was urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner was the non-placement of DNA profiling report on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
